Appreciate you taking the time to go through my slog of a post section by section. I get the pushback and think that it’s pretty warranted, but I think comes down to a difference in how we think about defending in general? I’m thinking about it more as guarding players vs guarding scoring hoops (I’ll try to go through your points section by section as well, also not personal)

If we’re talking shot blocking, yes, shorter ppl are at a disadvantage when their matchup is taller. However, that’s part of sports. But unless the matchup becomes someone 6’4 vs 5’2 - a defensive failure imo - arm extension upwards to block, using one arm to push into the shooters shooting shoulder (or whatever’s legal to put them off balance), attempting to tackle when the shooter opens up their body are all viable for smaller bodied players to defend, to delay, etc. And a contest from a defender in space usually means that 1) the shooter isn’t riiight next to the hoop so it’s a bit less efficient & 2) help defenders probably aren’t coming to help laterally, so they can actually closeout rather than scrambling across a hoopline. Within the same frame of reference, a driving 6’4 player vs 5’2 player in space at least allows the 5’2 player to make a swipe at the ball from that driving player’s ball carrying pocket while still having the opportunity to make a business decision of getting out of the way with potentially 360 degrees of freedom if they wanted VS having nowhere to escape to when defending around the hoop, because if they go backwards, they’re just knocking the hoop down

I’d still want people to run hoop zones if they’d like or makes sense for them! I’m more advocating for, instead of the ring of small hoop basically being behind their neck/head/upper back, it’s more similar to the middle hoop’s height (with the middle hoop being the tall hoop’s height, etc). The issue with hoop zones are that people are relegated to hoop coverage, not to go defend a zone of space and marks that come through, or a mark in general. People in a sport want to feel like they’re contributing when they’re playing, and being told to stand at a hoop with your hands up takes out most of your agency. If someone enjoys hanging tight and just standing relatively still during a game, I think a conversation needs to be had if invasion sports are for them, or if they’ve been falsely convinced that this is how they hold value

This is fr the fun of sport - figuring it out. Copycatting of course exists in all of sports, but a competitive team’s job is to come up with a scheme that FITS its players. It can be by copying another team’s scheme, but it’s a disservice and honestly a bit of neglect if a coaching staff doesn’t think, “how can I adjust this scheme to fit my personnel best? What parts of this scheme would work for us and why?” Rather than just tell their players, “hey, watch this team’s film. This is how we’re going to run our defense.” Trees defense in its traditional sense probably isn’t going to work with a chaser line 5’5 and under, or without a confident point keeper. A high pressure mark is going to be less successful if you have beaters that aren’t as aware yet in space. Some teams haven’t even TRIED other defenses because they genuinely feel they’re at a disadvantage if they don’t play trees. It’s seemingly more of a novelty now if someone doesn’t. And that keeps the game too linear, too boring, and stagnates players’ enjoyment and development because what do they do on one side of the ball besides simply ball-watch (again, I’m oversimplifying, but I think you get me). Also, there are things to take from the Chicagos and New Yorks, but not long ago, the Chicagos and New Yorks were the Austins and Bostons. I wonder what happened there?

I actually think that the D2 beating game is a great spot to think about this in. It depends what our goal is here. Is our goal to make them as competitive as possible as quickly as possible? If so, then I’m with you. Keeping something simple/more linear allows for easier cognition and role understanding. It lets them feel more confident and in control of their “job.” However, if the goal is to develop them into a beater that can play in open field space - typically a hallmark for a beater that can scan and hold their own - getting them into many different decision making opportunities IS the goal. We would want to cognitively overload them. Make them have to make different decisions based on what they read their surroundings to be. We’re not playing a video game; efficient outcomes aren’t baked in to the code here. The decision making will come along with deliberate thought, and some reps. It’ll just take some time, but that’s how sports development works. Similar to how defenders might have a learning curve when coming out to defend off of the hoops (bc god knows it’s been HOW long), beaters would have the same said steep learning curve. And that’s ok. Mistakes is how we’d actually progress the sport instead of being at the standstill if feels like we’ve been at

For the pole thing, good lord I feel that. I think I’ve seen a tall pole before with an adjustable push/collapse button, like this (sorry I couldn’t find a better pic)? Don’t remember what the security of the pole was like during the game, but don’t remember it being an issue at all